ENGLISH PAPERS

ABOUT GETTING GIRLS ONLINE

BY:
YOSAFAT PARULIAN H. SIPAYUNG 1902010292
ZULFAIDAH RAMADHAN JAMALUDIN 1902010013
YUNINGSIH PENUN LIMAU 1902010665
YOSUA BERLIM BETTY 1902010024
ZAINUDDIN M. Z. BEDA PAUKUMA 1902010527
YULIFEN KONIS 1902010

FACULTY OF LAW
UNIVERSITY OF NUSA CENDANA
KUPANG
2019

1
 PREFACE

Praise be to God Almighty for the blessings of his grace, and that we were given the
oppurtunity to be able to compile a working paper entitled “ Getting Girls Online” is properly
and correctly, and on time.

Hopefully this paper can give a broader insight to the reader. Altough this paper has
advantage and disadvantages. We ask constructive criticism and suggestions from you. Thank
you very much.

i
 TABLE OF CONTENS

CHAPTER I......................................................................................................................1
INTRODUCTION............................................................................................................1
1.1 Reading Text...............................................................................................................1
1.2 Problem Formulation...................................................................................................3
1.3 Purpose of The Paper...................................................................................................3
CHAPTER II....................................................................................................................4
DISCUSSION....................................................................................................................4
1.1 Who Is Nancy Leveson...............................................................................................4
1.2 What Is CEEP..............................................................................................................4
1.3 Percentage of Women Studying University................................................................4
CHAPTER III...................................................................................................................5
CONCLUSION.................................................................................................................5
3.1 Conclusion...................................................................................................................5
3.2 Suggest........................................................................................................................5

ii
 CHAPTER I

INTRODUCTION

1.1 Reading Text

When Nancy Leveson, now a computer science professor at the University of
Washington, was teaching math at a California high school, her best student also
happened to be one of the prettiest and most popular girls around. And when the girls got
the highest score on a test, Leveson thought nothing of announcing the achievement while
handling back the papers. As soon as the class ended, though, the distraught student
approached. She begged her teacher never, ever to embarrass her like that again.
The incident happened nearly 20 years ago, but Leveson notes that little has
changed. Now, as then, too many teenage girls feel uncomfortable and even unwelcome
in the realms of math, science and computing. Research shows that girls who are gifted in
these subjects in elementary school begin to shy away from them by seventh grade.
Eventually, they convince themselves that these are male domains. “By saying only men
are good at these things, you make the woman who are good at them seem like freaks,”
says Leveson.

Increasingly, however, educators are trying to reverse the process by retraining

teachers and redirecting students. Funded with more than $1 million by the National
Science Foundation (NSF) and seven corporations, Computer Equity Expert Project
(CEEP) showed 200 math and computer-science teachers how to recognise and eliminate
gender bias in their classroom. CEEP urged teachers to bring more girls into the world of
computers by setting up mentoring programs with older students and having girls-only
days at the school computer labs.

Both public and private school are trying to close the technology gap. Because
girls tend to do better in the science without distraction of boys, three California schools
have started girls-only math classes over the last two years, with promising results. Other
schools are hooking up with colleges for help and inspiration.
But however wonderful the subject looks in high school, interest often diminishes
in college, where women earned only 30% of the undergraduate degrees awarded in
computer science in 1991, and 16% in engineering in 1993, as opposed to medical school,
where woman make up 36% of total enrolment. The proportion shrinks still more at the
1
doctoral level, where woman receive only 15% of computer science PhDs and under 10%
of engineering PhDs.
Many college women are turned off by the macho of swagger of technojocks at
school like MIT, where staying awake for three days to perfect a piece of software is seen
as a test of virility. That kind of attitude “sets cultural parameters not just for MIT but for
the intense nature of the computer culture everywhere,” says Steven Levy, author of
Hackers: Heroes of the Computer Revolution. As a result, it’s hard to find female role
models in computer science.
To keep women interest in the field, Nancy Leveson and a colleague from the
University of British Columbia spearheaded a program that will match 20 female
undergraduates with faculty mentors around country this summer, thanks to a $240 000
grants from the NSF.
In Rochester, NY, the Rochester Institute of Technology’s Women in Science,
Engineering and Math mentoring program aims to spark high school girls’ career interest
by linking 140 girls and professional women in a computer network. Coordinators, who
hope to extend the four-month program to three years, note the intense interest shown by
girls and women. “I can’t keep the mentors away,” says Carol O’Leary, who helped set
the program up. “I was looking for 40, and I have 67. Women are anxious to give of
themselves.”

Eventually, these computer educators would like to make gender-specific

programs obsolete, but that will happen only when computer-science education become
more creative, according to Paula Rayman, director of Pathway for Woman in the
Sciences, a research program at Wellesley College. By way of example, Rayman points to
her-9-years-old daughter, Lily, whose fourth-grade class at the Bowman Elementary
School in Lexington, Mass., is learning several sciences under the guise of bicycle repair.
The kids aren’t just fixing bikes but ingesting knowledge about mechanics, scientific
history and the physics of motion. They’re also using their computer to generate charts,
graphs and database. Children of both sexes are eager to work with computers because
the machines are revealed as both entertaining and useful, not just a s a source of boring
drills or violent gamed, which girls usually find unappealing.

“When it comes to girls and computers,“ says Rayman, “we’ve found that there
are three ingredients for user-friendliness: hand-on experience, teamwork and relevance.”

2
 These ingredients, of course, would increase anyone’s mastery of computers, as well as
usefulness of the machines. By trying to do a better job of teaching girls, computer
scientists may learn quite a lot of themselves.

1.2 Problem Formulation

The formulation of the probem we took namely:

1) Who is Nancy Leveson?

2) What is CEEP?
3) How many percent of women who are studying in the University?

1.3 Purpose of The Paper

The purpose of this paper is:
1) Knowing Nancy Leveson.
2) Find out about CEEP.
3) Knowing the percentage of women studying University.

3
 CHAPTER II
DISCUSSION

1.1 Who Is Nancy Leveson

Nancy Leveson is a computer science professor at the University of Washington,
was teaching Math at a California High School.
1.2 What Is CEEP

CEEP is an abbreviation of Computer Equity Expert Project. CEEP urged

teachers to bring more girls into the world of computers by setting up mentoring
programs with older students and having girls-only days at the school computer labs.

1.3 Percentage of Women Studying University

Women earned only 30% of the undergraduate degrees awarded in computer
science in 1991, and 16% in engineering in 1993, as opposed to medical school, where
woman make up 36% of total enrolment. The proportion shrinks still more at the doctoral
level, where woman receive only 15% of computer science PhDs and under 10% of
engineering PhDs.

4
 CHAPTER III
CONCLUSION

3.1 Conclusion
The conclusion is:
1) Nancy Leveson is a computer science professor at the University of Washington, was
teaching Math at a California High School.
2) CEEP is an abbreviation of Computer Equity Expert Project. CEEP urged teachers to
bring more girls into the world of computers.
3) Women earned only 30% of the undergraduate degrees awarded in computer science
in 1991, and 16% in engineering in 1993, as opposed to medical school, where
woman make up 36% of total enrolment. The proportion shrinks still more at the
doctoral level, where woman receive only 15% of computer science PhDs and under
10% of engineering PhDs.
3.2 Suggest
We are as the writer want to apology for the shortage of this paper. We know that
is papert is still far from perfect. So that we need the suggest from the reader the
perfection of this paper. Thank you very much.